Just when I was on the verge of forgiving Newt Gingrich for the NY23 debacle.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are determined to pass ObamaCare, with a version that’s even more liberal than what came out of the Senate.
Politico: Struggling to salvage health reform, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have begun considering a list of changes to the Senate bill in hopes of making it acceptable to liberal House members, according to sources familiar with the situation.
The changes could be included in separate legislation that, if passed, would pave the way for House approval of the Senate bill — a move that would preserve President Barack Obama’s vision of a sweeping health reform plan.
But the move comes with political risk, because it would open Democrats up to charges that they pressed ahead with roughly the same health care bill that voters appeared to reject in the Massachusetts Senate race Tuesday. Republican Scott Brown won on a pledge to try to block Obama-style health reform.
The effort also puts Reid and Pelosi on the side of giving a sweeping reform bill one more try, instead of adopting a course being floated by some Democrats in Congress and at the White House of adopting a scaled-back bill including popular reform provisions.
The changes are being worked on this weekend with plans for Pelosi to present them to her caucus next week, according to sources familiar with the situation. But, sources stressed, neither Reid nor Pelosi know if this strategy can win the support of their members, but they are attempting it because it is the quickest path to passage.
Earlier this week, Pelosi said she did not have the votes to pass the Senate bill unchanged through the House. And Reid, who lost his 60-vote majority Tuesday, does not have the votes to make wholesale changes to legislation his chamber passed last month.
So, leaders are considering making limited changes that can be passed using a budget process called reconciliation, which only requires 51 votes in the Senate. ….
Alleged conservative Newt Gingrich thought he’d throw in his two cents, with ideas on how the GOP can work with Reid and Pelosi to ruin our health care. (Via Weasel Zippers)
Politico: Newt Gingrich thinks exultant Republicans might meander into a post-Brown partisan trap if they aren’t careful.
I spoke with Gingrich for a my story today [sic] about the huge burden on Nancy Pelosi in ramming through a health care bill. He said he doubted she could pull it off — but believes she could divide the House GOP by rushing through a goodies-only, scaled back measure with none of the downsides of the bigger bills.
Gingrich sees the Massachusetts as a boost for his party, but also as a renunciation of go-it-alone by either party, and thinks Republicans would be “clever” to pass a series of relatively non-controversial measures with “huge bipartisan majorities.”
It would be “clever” to “rush through a goodies-only, scaled back measure…?” Is he serious? The Democrats have made it quite clear they aren’t interested in any common sense solutions to bring down the cost of health insurance for Americans. And Newt’s pretty much made it clear that he’s more interested in saving the Republican Party, as opposed to taking back the Republican Party. I certainly hope he doesn’t run in 2012. My gosh, he could force me to vote for Huckabee in a primary.
If it’s any consolation, it doesn’t sound like John Boehner’s on board with Gingrich’s clever little plan.
Find out what others are saying here and here.
A little off topic, but since I’m speaking of people who are looking out for their own agenda rather than doing what’s right, what do you think of Dan Riehl’s assessment of Glenn Beck? I like Beck, but Riehl has a point.
I don’t agree with Riehl at all. I was troubled and angry that Beck said the crap about Scott Brown, I mean there was no excuse for it and I am not defending his remarks; however, Glenn Beck has done some good for the conservative movement. Whether or not he has a personal agenda, I don’t know, time will tell.
From reading what Riehl has said, his beef with Beck probably goes much further and deeper than what I am aware of. I will continue to watch Beck, however if I feel he is going the way of Olbermann I will stop. Nuff said.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Somebody needs to do a senility test on gingrich!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yeah you’re right. Newt is slowly driving me away from his camp and definitely getting to the point where I refuse to read his articles.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Newt is “bipolaritical”, and that is the result of running for office and not declaring. He’s either in or out. He needs to stop trying to pander as a candidate and pontificate as a sage. Dan Riehl is a good guy. I completely disagree with his assessment of Beck. Glenn has to take a place, and his place has been a message that’s neither too hard core nor wimpish, but undeniably informative. His special on progressives on Friday was excellent and enlightening. Yes, Glenn is an entertainer, and so is Dan, they just have different mediums. Dan needs to lighten up a bit and remember the words of Reagan. Driving wedges won’t help the cause.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Very well said!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0